Fini, A A F and Forsythe, P (2020) Barriers to reusing and recycling office fit-out: An exploratory analysis of demolition processes and product features. Construction Economics and Building, 20(4), pp. 42-62. ISSN 2204-9029
Abstract
Within the highly waste-generative context of Australia, waste from demolition of office fit-out significantly contributes to unsustainable landfilling. The extant literature is, however, slim on scrutiny of the situation. Therefore, this study aims to uncover office fit-out demolition processes and product features that drive high ratio of landfilling fit-out elements. The research used ten case projects and fourteen interviews to document visible and latent parameters of office fit-out waste. Waste-stream mapping and decision-tree techniques, in conjunction with basic descriptive statistics, were used to model and visualize the extent and drivers of unsustainable fit-out demolition. Further, an exemplar product features analysis was conducted to validate the identified drivers. The findings show that 78% of fit-out waste from the studied cases is landfilled. This high rate is attributed to both latent and visible factors. The main latent factor is high lease price of premium or high-quality offices which favours expeditious demolition with low consideration for reuse and recycling. Key technically visible barriers are volumetric furniture, heterogeneous fit-out assemblies, and insufficient critical mass. To move away from landfilling, production of office fit-out should be transformed for sustainable material adequacy, product re-configurability and de-constructability, and easy handling in the use phase.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | office fit-out waste; demolition processes; product features; production for reuse/recycle. |
| Index terms: | recycle, interview, lease, recycling, Australia, mapping, stream, sustainable material, statistics, constructability |
| Subjects: | spatial and geospatial analysis, construction integration, land economics, Geography, water management, mathematical modelling, data collection methods, sustainable materials, waste management |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Construction Materials, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here